TS-2000 ACC2 Main and Sub audio

Discussion in 'Working Different Modes' started by KE7BEX, Dec 4, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: abrind-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
  1. KE7BEX

    KE7BEX Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hey guys, sorry if this has been asked already. I was unable to find it.

    Anyone know if I will run into an issue by connecting acc2 pins 1 and 3?

    Here is whats going on. I have a good working setup as shown below. The red (add) shows where I want to connect the sub audio. Please forgive me for any mistakes in the diagram. I made it while revers engineering an old interface for another radio that I adapted to the Kenwood.

    As you can see, the right and left audio channels are combined from the PC. Just wondering if I could do the same with the main and sub audio from the radio (without the padding resistors ).

    upload_2019-12-4_12-1-20.png

    Thanks and 73

    David
    Ke7bex
     
  2. N5TJD

    N5TJD XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    On my 13 pin din, I used cat6 to bring out the PTT and MIC, but broke out the audio to a stereo female TRS so I could have the option of using both audio channels or just one. Doing as you suggest might overload the two outputs, essentially making them both have to "fight" each other. I am far from a knowledgeable source, but if you do a search for a "Simple Audio Mixer Circuit" online you may get some ideas.

    One seems to simply be the same as your schematic, but adding a 10k resistor to each source BEFORE they "Y" together and go to the isolation xformer.

    Good luck, and have fun.

    addendum: I am sure
     
  3. KE7BEX

    KE7BEX Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thank you for the reply N5TJD

    I don't know why in never crossed my mind to look for a mixing circuit, I sure found a lot of them. I had noticed the way that the board I am using combined the stereo output from the pc but thought it to be more for bringing down the audio to line level. And that made me not want to follow suit because the output from the ACC2 port is already low enough.

    Nonetheless, I think you are correct and I thank you for your time.

    73

    -David
    ke7bex
     

Share This Page